Single 2560x1440 vs triple 1920x1080 monitors
If you had $700-800 to spend on a gaming monitor setup, would you rather have one single high resolution monitor or 3 lower res monitors in eyefinity or nvidia surround? Assume the monitors are the same size and overall quality.
You can get a 2560x1440 monitor for $310, and I would definitely take this route.
I used to have 3 22' 1080[ displays, and loved them. For productivity, gaming and just looking generally effing awesome, However:
After a while it became such a drag, many (maybe even most) games didn't work well or at all, win 7's snap features don't work per screen but overall (depending on your settings, I just had all as a single surface in eyefinity).
So, after a good half year with that setup I ditched it and got myself a 2560*1440 monitor, cheapest one I could find one about 550 euro, Dell U2711. I was alarmed that this was the cheapest I could find that resolution, but after doing some careful research I found that it was no plain TN panel display, it was an IPS display. Supposedly acclaimed for being awesome in sharpness and colour reproduction. You should see into it. I decided to get it, and have no regrets. I MUCH prefer the huge resolution, general awe-inspiring image quality, functionality, and it's sheer size. I use it as my TV, Displayport goes to my PC, HDMI from my tuner and I use it's stereo out to my amp. It's bloody awesome.
I had my worries that I would miss the screen real estate I got used to with 3 1080p screens, but it really isn't an issue. I only have windows open in half screens, since no websites will be wider than 1280 pixels (obviously, since a fair portion of laptops and PC's have this as their width resolution).
I can't put enough emphasis on it though, the glory of a 27" IPS 2560*1440 far exceeds that of 3x 1080p. I sware, I walk into stores now and every screen they have their just seems small and kinda lifeless in color.
Either way you go, make sure they are IPS displays though. With that budget you should be able to afford it. Pure screen real estate isn't everything, its also how it's represented, I find that far more important, and given how much I care about screen real estate, that's saying quite a bit.
anyways I can go on and on about it, but I believe I've made my point. :P
I use my setup for many things, amongst which gaming. Everything looks so glorious when huge like this and with the enormous resolution Anti-Aliasing becomes almost redundant.
People complain about longer response times from IPS panels, but I call BS. Maybe they have longer response times, but I'll tell you now that I don't notice a thing at all, and my FPS gamer friend (I'm not that skilled, never was, but he is) loves playing on the big screen. He never noticed response time issues, and found that the larger resolution lets you see better detail especially in the distance (Snipers, yes, his KD went up noticeably every time he played at my place, better than when I had the eyefinity setup. Although this could be coincidence, it's worth mentioning.
I prefer having just one Bentley in my garage, over 3 identical Toyota's.
Read some reviews on the screen though, see what other people have to say about it, and if you take the plunge, make sure you get it at a place with a good return policy, because everyone's preferences are different. I love it, but you might hate it.
Oh, and try putting an IPS next to an ordinary TN panel, then laugh at the difference and ask yourself why you ever even bothered using TN panels.
EDIT: I can't really make myself to clear I think, but what I'm trying to say is that I way prefer the IPS panel for every type of use, whether it be gaming, movies (OMG, movies look 10x more amazing btw), even document editing or just browsing the interwebz. The only two downsides I can think of that actually matter are
A. Three screens next to eachother kinda looks cooler than one big one, but one big one definetely looks pretty damn awesome.
B. Once you start with such a screen size and IPS level of quality you'll never go back. You'll be forced all your life to buy expensive monitors when you want an upgrade and you'll always question why people used these tiny 22-24 inch screens (Seriously, I consider them effing tiny, never thought I'd see it this way)
N.Broekhuijsen said:People complain about longer response times from IPS panels, but I call BS. Maybe they have longer response times, but I'll tell you now that I don't notice a thing at all, and my FPS gamer friend (I'm not that skilled, never was, but he is) loves playing on the big screen. He never noticed response time issues, and found that the larger resolution lets you see better detail especially in the distance (Snipers, yes, his KD went up noticeably every time he played at my place, better than when I had the eyefinity setup. Although this could be coincidence, it's worth mentioning.
I have the U2711 and I love it. Do loads of multimedia work on it, real estate & color utopia. As for gaming, I disagree. It really isn't a good gaming display if you are playing games that require sensitive timing (streetfighter, guitar hero and fps). Great for casual gaming and responsive enough for single player campaign though.
I have the BenQ XL2420T 120hz monitor and it's gaming performance absolutely dwarfs the U2711. U2711 has around 30-40ms of latency, ~20th of a second, seems like nothing and silly to complain about, but it is very significant. Check out http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/ on my U2711, I'll consistently score 40ms higher than the XL2420T. I use it for all gaming now, including halo on the xbox! Check out some other 120hz monitors and see if there is one you like because I'm pretty sure the XL2420T isn't the best value for money out there, but afaik the Xl2420T is highly rated and I just wanted the best for peace of mind. The colors and image quality on the U2711 is of course in a different league to the benq display. So it's not worth overlooking either if superior picture quality is that important to you. (i.e, do you play games with the settings maxed out, even though you are compromising fps/your performance? if so, you'll probably prefer the u2711... on the other hand, if you're always lowering quality settings to squeeze out a constant 60fps you'll probably be happy to compromise on the dells superior colors) I wish I could have the best of both but in the heat of an intense gaming session, all I really care about is a good 1080p resolution, high fps with no slowdowns and low input latency.
As for triple monitor setups, I wouldn't recommend it. It seems like a bit of a novelty. I wouldn't want to do competitive gaming that way, and I wouldn't want to play through single player campaigns that way either. I think the "novelty" of 3D is actually much stronger than surround vision at the moment. Each to their own though, I only tried triple display once (in bf3 with gtx 670 across 3 1080p displays) and I was underwhelmed. So, I'd recommend:
casual gaming/beating single player campaign - big ass monitor (ie dell u3011 @2560x1600)
competitive gaming - single 120hz display without any question. Every other setup is a disadvantage to your performance
When shopping for a new monitor, always look for the highest quality panel with the best color. Even IPS panels can have incredibly low input lag, faster than some "gaming monitors". Just make sure it has an average response time of less than 16ms.
I think the Dell U2312HM is one of the best gaming monitors sold, a better gaming monitor than the BenQ XL2420T.
I would read a few articles on tftcentral.co.uk to get a general feel for what monitors you should be looking at. Select what you are looking for in a monitor and the selector will do the rest. Just be sure to read the reviews and check out the input lag to see if the monitor you are looking at has acceptable levels.
When talking about 60hz vs 120hz panels for gaming, it really makes no difference. The only thing that matters is the input lag.
If I had that kind of money I would look at importing a Hazro HZ27WC from the UK or buying an HP ZR2740w in the US.
cuecuemore said:You can get a 2560x1440 monitor for $310, and I would definitely take this route.
how about the quality of these products comparing with some famus brands?